No my 5 foot 2 frame was not quite made for basketball.
OK, we'll call the meeting to order.
The Redmond city council.
And first item is 1,200 acres.
I think I sent everyone a memo just this morning.
But anyway, where I was left off from last week's joint meeting
with the commissioners was kind of up in the air.
So I'm hoping that the council would ask the County to take
over the project in terms of funding something in 26, 27
to keep it moving forward.
I do think it's a good project for Redman.
The one.
Return on investment that I could see that makes
sense out of the 1,200 acres.
Is that a percentage of any proceeds of sales
of the property by the County would go into infrastructure
in the Redmond community, particularly
improving the crappy County roads we end up inheriting.
So obviously there's miles and miles to go on that,
but I would hope that we would encourage the County
to proceed with that.
But I'll throw it open to you guys
for interested investors and the development
of the 1,200 acres County.
Just the County.
There's no third party.
They're going to self develop.
No, no.
I mean how they do it is up to them.
They're the owner of the properties.
Whether they hire a contractor like that stuff in Phoenix.
And there's a whole thing at once
or whether they piecemeal that's going to be up to the County.
Do we not have any concerns that they're going to take, maybe
like the design or plans that was presented
to us with the curvy roads and the non straight streets,
and master plan it that way and hand it back because that's
the path of least resistance now that it's there, instead of I
mean, I have no problem in the future getting the County
to do a master plan annexation.
But who designs that master plan.
Is that going to fall to the County then.
It has to.
It's their property.
And that concerns me because I don't as the Redmond city
council, that we want the County deciding
what our roads and infrastructure
are going to be in that area.
I mean, it's still a land use application to the city.
And working with Nick and Peter Kotowski
on this from the County planning department,
they are totally interested in having the city's, I'll call it
imperator on this property, be really the driving force on it,
but it's a County property they're
going to have to fund however it goes forward, because it's
not a city project.
Now, there's all kinds of possibilities
that we do a joint venture with the County on it,
but I don't think we're interested in doing
it at this juncture because we got enough on our plate.
Exactly I think we were pretty clear that we didn't when we
spoke about this in our goals, that it wasn't something
to add to the 2026 plan.
I don't have a problem asking the County to take it on.
I fear that the County taking it on is not productive.
And now you're turning something over to them that wouldn't it
be better to wait till 2028 and then do a joint venture
or something, but to plan it out in the future
where there's good oversight as to what we're bringing
into our city as part of what Redmond looks
like, as opposed to what the County decides what we need.
So one option.
Makes some sense is we'll have five commissioners next year.
In 2027.
That might be the appropriate time
to start working on some type of joint venture on it
to have some funding from the County
and the 2728 budget cycle.
That would make some sense to me.
And there's a land use change here that they have to go for.
The original idea was the more you get this
to where this is a great plan, the more it's easier to sell to.
Legislators say it makes total sense
to bring this in as one unit into the UTB, which is totally
outside the box for the LCD.
And I get that.
I just default back to the County
as that one person to do that.
Even if we had five people there,
what we're looking at right now is 3 to four of them,
without that level of legislative competence
or negotiation skills.
I mean, they're new.
They're going to walk into this thing brand new
and learning everything as they go.
I don't know.
I guess the County should take it over.
We have no bandwidth or time, but are they
the right entity for now, or do we want
to wait and have a say later.
That's the hard part for me.
I don't think I feel like we're pushing it forward so we can say
that it's there without looking at what that could end up being
and built our standards.
Yeah, I said like I said at the joint meeting,
I finally I get why it's such an attractive project.
My fear is we are strictly from an experience standpoint.
We are going to be looking at four County
commissioners, maybe two of which
will have had any experience with land use.
You'd have if Commissioner Bowen is reelected,
he's got some experience and Commissioner
Chang isn't up for reelection.
Those are the only two land use experience.
Commissioner Chang has not expressed
any interest in doing this.
He still wants to piecemeal the West Side one at a time.
Didn't show any interest in the East side.
Didn't show any interest in the West Side
because he can't quite figure out that we
could do two things at once.
And my fear is, if we pointed out to them, hey,
we've got this great opportunity for you, they may screw it up,
for lack of a better term.
I mean, I think that is my concern.
It's like, what conceptually that is a good idea,
but it's not one we're ready for and we're
handing it over to the least qualified drivers.
I don't want to let my kids redecorate my living room,
I guess.
I mean, the driving force on land use is not Tony.
And to some extent Phil, it's Nick lack and Peter
Grotowski and those people.
And I have a lot of faith and trust in them.
And they are from our conversations
that been a part of.
They're 110% behind us because they
can see the benefit of balancing out our community
on the East side and.
This has been in the plans for 20 years that East side plan.
And Nick was the one who actually
developed that East side plan.
I think any of us have a problem with East side development.
I think we have a problem with the timing of East side
development and the time frame.
I think that's really what my biggest concerns are.
And then, of course, again, I don't have the faith in Nick
and Peter that you do because I don't
have the experience with them.
But I can take that with a grain of salt.
So the only thing that I was thinking that would happen
in the 2627 budget cycle, which is like 15 months out,
is that they would do.
An environmental assessment, which doesn't do anything
in terms of planning.
But it shows what some of the challenges
would be, particularly on the fill from the dump.
And any issue with homeless encampments out there.
It doesn't change the dynamic of the plan.
It doesn't.
It's just an environmental assessment.
So I guess since it is County owned property and correct me
if I'm wrong in any statement, the reason we're still
discussing it is for the potential in the future for it
to be annexed into the city of Redmond as that 1,200 acres,
correct Correct.
Do we have the capacity to keep it from getting piecemeal
if I mean, that's but I mean, in terms of annexation,
we do as we do.
But if the County still owns it, we don't have that.
If you abandon that, what is that ability worth anything.
Let me put it this way.
If you abandon it and just say no, we're
not going to do anything with it, it makes it more likely
that the County is just going to do whatever they want to do.
But, I mean, I have talked ad nauseam
on, so I'm going to shut up.
I think a long term, I think a study that's
looking forward long term on it, I think is probably
worth the conversation.
And that just in simply in that respect, so that
we can try to keep it together as one large section
for future development.
Well, and again, that has to be approved at the state level.
So that bandwidth and that teeing up.
So I guess next question, because you want
to do an environmental study in 2728,
figure out if it's feasible.
Players will change and then we're into 2829.
That would be when OK, we have a feasibility.
Should we take this to the legislature
or when do you see that happening.
If we want 1,200 acres going to the legislature,
29 or 31, 29 or 31.
OK, so with the question that John or excuse me,
Councilor John proposed.
Is there an opportunity and maybe
this is a question or a KW question.
Enter into an IgA.
So it isn't split up.
I would recommend I mean I think the sense
I got from the council was a master plan for the 1,200 acres.
Makes a lot of sense.
Development on Northeast revenue makes sense,
but we want to have some measure of input on it
so they don't screw it up.
Yeah, that's like the US hockey team did yesterday.
That goalie was winning.
I mean, I picture is everything.
I think an MOU that kind of states our intent
IgA that's above my pay grade.
But I think just something that simply says this
is what we're trying to do.
And letting them dip a toe but not go so fast that you can't.
Yeah, it's an agreement.
We don't split it up.
What does that look like in resources and time.
I mean, from our standpoint and to their standpoint,
because the goal of pushing it out was to save on the resources
here in the city so we can get done our tasks.
And so I'm totally OK handing off work to them.
But by having an IgA, what does that take
back and put back in our court.
I'm going to shut up to.
The IgA would lay out the goal that it's in the best interests
of the community to have a master plan for the 1,200 acres,
to bring it in as one unit, to develop it as a master plan
in a form that the city and County can agree upon,
and that certain incremental steps will
be taken over the next two or three
years budgeted by the County.
And then at that point, somewhere in that 2829 time
frame, then it would get a more serious in terms of actually
diving in with a work plan with the planning department.
And the planning commission as to what this animal
is going to look like.
OK can we do that without getting a significant to do list
from County commissioners that are skeptical of development
on the East side, because that was one of the comments
that Commissioner Chang brought up was like, well,
he wants an impact study, and he wants to see usage in a 20 year
plan for the East side before he wants
to entertain the West Side.
Yeah, you can just look at East side growth.
And I mean, that was necessary and extrapolate
from those numbers.
That is not complex.
That is just lazy on his part.
Well I mean OK.
And my one concern is that in a five year plan that we have
right now, we don't even have the roundabout coming through
in 20 10th Street coming through until that time
period you're talking about.
And to me, those things have to be advanced or something
to be built so that we can have something on the West Side
especially.
Well, I agree, and I think that would still be a lot to have
a lot of balls in the air.
That's right.
East side.
The East side is fine, but we got problems with the West Side.
We need to make sure we get handled.
Where are we with the wrap for the West Side.
Beginning stages.
Yeah, we started that effort a couple years ago
and had to press pause after.
We did a significant amount of community input,
but we were to the point of like drafting a plan
and coming up with different scenarios
to then present through the adoption process
and more community outreach.
So, Keith, from a staffing standpoint,
if we wanted to entertain some type of I
guess, declaration to work with the County
to do this, what would it look like in terms of staff time,
in terms of capacity.
How many windows do you have to nail shut to keep
people from jumping out.
I mean, depends on the scope creep.
That's not going to drink all this month because you're
like only on Tuesdays.
That's my.
I mean, that's kind of what I'm afraid of is if we go into.
Yeah so yeah, I'm not contradicting that.
But I mean, kind of pretty clear that I
can't do anything on this.
I'm not going to put any money so we can put whatever agreement
we want together.
And it'll be like, great, thanks.
And then they're going to ask questions like,
is this more of a priority than A, B and C.
I mean I. Councilor Patrick was speaking to I
think maybe less than that.
I mean, I wouldn't want to see us start deciding to reserve
infrastructure to the East side that I would
say to the West Side, because we've
begun to crawl forward on this.
And I mean, so and I don't want to dedicate
a bunch of staff time to it if they're not ready to go.
And I think that's kind of my fear.
Like, I would like to see us do some kind of something
that just simply says, this is our intent,
but I don't want them to come back with a to do list.
If they're just playing for time and they're fine giving us busy
work to their US and ignore us.
And that's my fear.
I heard they were not interested in this at all.
That's what I heard.
But I mean, from a policy perspective, your policy.
And if you want to sketch a framework,
I just don't want to see on behalf of staff,
I just want to make sure we manage scope creep on this
so it doesn't become crumbs that then turn into letter crumbs.
Is there any reason that this can't just
be a placeholder in our thought processes
until we hit our goal session in 2027
and then re-approach the County with it,
then when we're getting into a longer legislative session,
we're looking at different land use.
I have concerns.
I was on the Northwest group.
That's why I left that it's not been completed because it's been
a while since I've been on planning, but it's been a while,
and I think that if we balance our focus on what we've approved
as far as annexation and growth and get some
of those infrastructure pieces done to the West Side
organically, that will allow us to have the balance a little bit
later to investigate the East side,
but I think everybody wants to see
some traction on those corridors on the West Side that
are strained.
And unfortunately, as we improve those corridors,
we'll get more traffic because we'll build more homes.
So that doesn't help with the problem
that Ed solved by putting this together.
And we would add to it by improving those corridors.
It will make it more traffic and more trips and more people
because it opens up all that annexation.
We have an agenda today, so why don't we do this.
I agree, let's defer to the goal session
at the end of the year for the next council.
Does that make sense.
Do you want to put the piece next,
just in case we lose people in terms of the 22 acres
and there's under miscellaneous on this agenda.
Sure go ahead.
All right.
So there's a discussion at 4:00.
Josh and I have to go meet with the city of bend on Monday.
This developer is different for her, and he had met with staff
and wanted to die.
And I guess I'm looking at both you and I agree it has better
knowledge to 5.0.82 acres.
OK, OK.
Yeah so this is a project where Randy lives
just South of his property.
There's that long, narrow piece goes out to the Canyon rim.
They want to put some cluster development up there.
They owned 0.82 acres in the County.
I met with Vicente last week sometime.
The discussion was on the 0.2 acres.
I think they had originally asked the city to buy it.
I said, well, might make some sense is if they deeded that 0.2
acres, which is right next to the bulb fields,
and got a credit for their park SDCS
just on that development, that would make some sense to me.
And I think having an incentive of having people deed property
in the Canyon to the city.
Rather than having that mix of private ownership
and city ownership down there long term makes sense.
So that was the nature of the discussion.
And then the complexity.
All I can do is introduce it because it's not in the park's
master plan and not a project.
So you would have to amend it to help this individual.
And, and I mean, so it's complex.
And what area do you have a little bit more background on.
If you want to lay out just the objective pieces and then
council can discuss it.
Yeah I'll take it a little bit larger
than just this one property.
So in our land use or in our 2040 plan,
as well as in all of our policies and how land use
works within or on the Canyon rim, a lot of the property.
There's setbacks, the fencing requirements, setbacks.
At 10 feet, there's structural setbacks at 25.
And what that is to do is to protect the Canyon
and as a community asset.
So no development can happen.
So every time we have a development
that happens on the Canyon rim with contractors
or with developers, the request is that piece of property that's
from the Canyon rim into the Canyon floor
that they might own, the city would pay for those things.
But when we have previous negotiations with them,
it's protected already.
And so our negotiations are that you
can gift this piece of property, because although I might think
it's priceless when it comes to a development,
it's useless land because it's protected
underneath our land use things.
So one of the developers on the Canyon,
requesting that the piece of property,
it's 0.82 acres that he would then that would be protected
open space that the city would pay for that.
And so the negotiations that we've had so far between myself,
James and Vicente is no, it's not
part of our parks master plan.
It's protected land already as per policy.
And so you're welcome to donate this to the city.
We'll take over liability.
We'll take over maintenance.
And in exchange for your donation,
we will provide a receipt of donations.
So usually it's a tax credit letter.
So deduction deduction.
Yeah I say credit but it's a tax deduction letter
that they can use one time.
And so then leading up to this yeah it went to the mayor.
And here we are with the conversation.
So this is actually yeah this is the property.
This is where the puppies live, or Randy povey.
And then here's the piece that they're talking about.
We're specifically talking about 25 from the rim
into the Canyon floor.
And how many homes do you want to put there.
And he's putting cottage units or planning
to put cottage units.
16 of them.
16 Yeah.
From here.
That way.
It's another one of those projects that.
Oh, yeah, it is, I would think of but.
I don't care.
I mean, it's just that was the thought that crossed my mind,
but it's just more of a fairness issue
of what you do with these property
that people own in the Canyon.
But you do get this request probably three or four times
a year, about how we can make it work.
The most recent one was, I want to say,
the land use with high desert, seven acres.
Their annexation is what they ended up gifting the city.
So it wouldn't be a one off, actually.
But if we change the parks master
plan and made this arrangement for one person.
All right, I'd just.
When we drop it, it's just embryonic thought
in a conversation.
Did I desert actually did that to the city.
It's part of the.
They're deeding it to the city.
Part of their land use.
I thought they said they were going to have
the HOA take care of it.
Yeah they haven't.
I had preliminary discussions with them
and they said they entertained.
They would look into it, but I haven't heard.
Yeah, we suggested it.
Yeah OK.
Anything else on that.
No no.
OK that'll make it better.
A few statements here.
So for three, just to let the executive committee of Core 3
is going to recommend to the full board of Core three
to stop any further discussions.
Having them come to the city just seems weird to me,
because they would have to file a land use application
with the city and having the council say, oh yeah,
we're all for it.
We're just disqualify the council from ever hearing it.
So I would like core three take care of it
first and see what happens.
OK anyone have any questions on that Central Oregon
irrigation district piping.
So we finally got the environmental impact statement.
They're going to remove from the aquifer
14 billion gallons of water a year
basically right under Redmond and just South
of Redmond, which will have a significant impact
on our ability to get water in the future.
These are going to meet with John and Craig.
Craig oral us next week when you get back.
So I mean to me it's kind of an existential threat to the city.
So any questions on that.
No I mean I in our experience would not use that as that's why
your water table is falling.
They would put it back on us as overuse and be more stringent.
So yeah, I think it's something you need to look at.
And I guess my theory is we're not against the piping per se.
We're against the diversion of that 14 billion gallons of water
to Jefferson County.
It's like taking our water and shipping it elsewhere.
And we asked them about the piping
when they like six or seven years ago.
And it was an idea and they're like,
there'll be a little bit of artificial what do you call it.
Removal of artificial.
Yeah, that goes away.
But it was very minimal.
That's what I was going to ask because the piping would
not be 14 billion gallons.
Yeah, yeah.
And this is why the tribes have talked informally about wanting
to get an updated study on the impact of piping,
to be able to have a more comprehensive water
conversation, which some folks aren't
that interested in finding out.
But the innie, the infiltration of water.
Yeah no, it's so one option that Owen is looking at
and Josh and I have talked about is an artificial recharge
of taking that 14 billion gallons, or at least most of it
maybe, and send some to Jefferson County, but most of it
being recharged back into the aquifer, which is kind of tricky
because you want to make sure you
don't contaminate the aquifer.
So there's a lot going on in that thing.
Artificially recharge from the pipeline.
Curious pressurized pipeline.
Yeah It would have to be taken out
like before it goes into pipe and sends
somewhere for recharge.
At least, I think.
But we'll talk to Owen about it.
Talk to Jason.
That's all.
OK Kyle, you want to talk a little about the work.
Your department's work plan for 2016?
Sure OK.
Handing out.
But we also have it here on this screen.
This is just kind of a check in with council last month
at the planning commission.
We presented this planning division work plan.
And the idea here this is obviously not everything
that planning division is working on,
but these are the items that will basically
come before planning commission and then
subsequently to city council.
So just really quickly this looks probably a little
familiar to last year's plan.
But for our private development applications,
these are the ones that would go to a hearing.
These are the ones that we know of right now.
And that's going to be the Redmond East gateway, which
is about 200 acres on the East side
of town, industrial property that
will include a master development plan
and zone change.
And then, of course, the North point vista project,
that will be a planned unit development
that will go through the hearings process
with planning commission and city council.
And then obviously as the year goes on more probably
end up seeing a couple more private master development plans
that will go through the process with planning
commission and city council.
The second category here is area planning, public facility
plans and inventories.
So some of this was a carryover from last year.
At one point council had an interest
in seeing this current status of our existing area
plans, how much they're built out.
So we're talking about the Northwest
area plan, the highway 97 area plan,
and the Southwest area plan.
This would be kind of a progress report
back to both planning commission and city council
to see how much more lands within these areas.
We have to go until they're fully developed.
The housing capacity analysis.
This is a big project that we will
probably start in early April.
This is a grant that we got from DLCD
and we're working closely with the consultant.
Corey's leading this initiative.
But basically what this is it's essentially going to be updating
our housing needs analysis, looking
at the land needed to accommodate the needed
housing for the next 20 years.
Once we get that piece of it done,
the subsequent piece will be housing production strategy.
And that's going to be more like an action
item, what is the city going to do to help
get houses built quicker.
So that's going to be all together.
That'll probably be an in 1818 to possibly 24 month
initiative, again the first piece
of housing capacity analysis that will be starting in April.
And obviously council and planning
commission and the community will be really
involved with that portion.
There'll be a lot of outreach and a lot of data
sorting through and whatnot, large lot
industrial infrastructure.
You have to follow through with what the state
requires as far as density.
Or can we do realistic stuff to be determined.
Chances are when we do the housing production strategy
again, that's when we're going to be looking at action items
to get more housing built. We may talk
about what we do with density.
I don't know yet, but that could be a while beyond density.
What about housing types.
Because not every house that we're producing
is for a workforce or affordable buyer.
So we have to have all types of housing for all types
of people that live here.
Where does that fit into this.
I think that's going to be the first part really is examining
what we have on the ground now and how much land we have,
and that will give us that good base knowledge.
We have pushback with that knowledge.
Then if we have all this workforce housing
that we've just committed to.
So now we need to maybe build some
beyond middle housing homes that are on 6,000 square foot lots.
I mean, that seems like a luxury today.
So we'll just go with 6,000.
I like that line of questioning because right now,
if I go downtown to ask people, they're going to be
more affordable than to do it.
And we do build apartments all the time.
Yeah do we track vacancy in our apartments Yes we do.
You can get the data through American Community Survey.
They track vacancy rates.
Perfect thank you.
I think one thing that I think council
is as we go into this year and work on these plans,
where can council begin to more exert kind of their policy ideas
into some of these as they get developed.
So yeah, Corey and I are working with a consultant
right now on that scope of work, and there definitely
is areas where council are going to need policy buy in
and whatnot.
And we're getting close to reviewing that now.
But yes.
OK I'll ask you.
So in terms of these plans whether it's
the capacity the capacity analysis right to build out
and the time frames, I think it'd be helpful,
I think for them to just build another, oh, hey,
come May, June with a couple of these plans
here, that's when we can really dig in
and try and cure your preferences.
Council and how we try to align these plans
with your preferences as we go forward.
I think that's just if you can give
an idea of that trajectory to them
today that will help them think about the upcoming year.
And when that happens, I would certainly
invite the planning commission members to participate in that.
Just so we're all on the same page to the best extent,
greatest extent possible.
Can you want to hit a couple of those.
So like the development applications
when do we anticipate those going to council.
Those will be mid-year and probably at that point
probably a little too soon.
Probably a little too soon before we weigh into more
of the policy discussion as part of the housing
capacity analysis.
Is there any point on.
And I'm going to ask it like the slow kid that I am.
There any point on there where we get to have an opinion.
Because that's the part where I mean,
because it does kind of sound like
it's just being prescribed to us and then
as directed by the state.
And I guess that's my question.
And that's I think a lot of that's going to be,
again, that housing production strategy, where right now
the capacity analysis is basically gathering
all the information, existing data, looking at PSU population
numbers and the projection of the needed housing
within the last 20 years.
The second piece of that is going to be very policy heavy,
and that's going to involve a lot of councils thoughts
and on how are we going to meet the targeted needs.
But we're going to be given the target to meet.
We just have to decide the pain threshold.
Yeah, a lot of it.
Yeah what I'm hearing is a very small
window, is what I'm hearing.
The first half is just data collection and analysis.
Windows and prisons.
I'm actually what I was thinking that is
like when I. When my wife says, do you want to go out to dinner.
I say, yes.
And I say, where do you want to go.
And she says, it doesn't matter, but it does matter.
I can pick anywhere I want.
That's what she wanted to go.
So yeah.
Yeah the last three items in that second category,
these are the large light industrial infrastructure master
plan.
Jessica and her team have been working on that.
And we're getting closer to adoption phase, which.
So we're targeting spring late spring for that.
The West Redmond area plan, as I mentioned earlier,
that's going to be an initiative that we pick back up.
We had to press pause on that a couple years ago
because we were doing the collection system master
planning, and we had to have a better
idea of the infrastructure needs in that part of town
before we proceeded with the planning of that area.
So we'll look to pick that up spring, summer and then
parks master plan, I think.
I don't have a timeline on that, but I think we're still
looking to take that back to the adoption process
sometime this year.
I think that's a great discussion.
I think some of the things we've looked at is we look at master
plan updates as being ready to update
our SDCS in order to support the projects that are in those.
So I think there's a larger conversation at work there
that would help fill out that line item
and listen differently.
But I have no comment.
And then the last portion here, development code amendments
annexation ordinance, which I'll talk about here in a little bit.
Corey and I have been working on getting a draft ready for that.
And then the second one, this is, for lack of better words,
we're calling the housing in the neighborhood design package.
This is really that comprehensive look
into the development code.
And when we think about the design
and feel on how we design our neighborhoods,
this would be the examination of basically
all of our zoning standards.
And so that'll be a comprehensive look with a lot
of stakeholder involvement.
And obviously APA will be part of that discussion,
which is just beginning.
And then related to that defensible space standards.
This is around wildfire.
This is where if you think about firewise,
communities, and vegetation.
And that sort of thing, sisters has
adopted a defensible space standards
in their development code.
And that's becoming much more common.
And we're working closely with Tom Mooney and the fire.
So if we adopt something like that.
Does it become Citywide, or can we actually
put it in areas that are more prone to dry Canyon developments
and things like that.
Or it's one and done.
It would be the entire city.
That just helps my brain.
That's all good.
And then the last one, this is updating the city County
joint management agreement.
This is a big initiative.
It's been on the table.
This would really be working very closely
with the County board of County Commissioners
and their planning staff.
And really, this is a joint management agreement
on how we administer the land use regulations
in our urban growth boundary, lands
that have yet to be brought into the city limits.
So that's a lot of that's procedure
and that sort of thing.
So that December time frame would be a good place
to placeholder to 1,200 acres.
Yeah I agree because we're having that conversation.
One quick thing for clarification
to last week or two weeks.
Couple of weeks ago, excuse me, when we had the folks that
came in and talk about updating our building code
to include 327 of the building code, which
is the fire firewise hardening.
I just wanted to make it kind of clear to what is here as far as
dispensable, defensible space.
I can say that is more of a land use
where the other one is building is a building code.
We have 327 in there anywhere.
So 327 and so that's where.
So to answer that a little bit.
So I've been working with Alex on 327
right now the state is going to be
updating the Residential Code.
That will be something we don't have a choice on to adopt
that will be adopted, that will be
done by the state on October 1.
What Alex and I were talking about,
typically when we do discretionary code adoptions,
we usually do a six month notification to say here,
council will adopt this with a six month lead,
to where it's voluntary before it comes home.
And that gives us an opportunity for the building department
to set up training, education over that course
of period of time to get the builders, vendors, all of that.
With that said, in order we thought
it would be good that when the residential building
code excuse me, when the.
Yeah, the residential building code on October one
is if we as council if you all adopt 327
and we bring that to you in May with some public outreach
between now and then with the builders and the vendors
and so forth, then that we would be able to have the summer
to educate, and then it would go into actual at the same time,
the residential.
So with our production builders and I actually sound like a fan
right now, but I think to be a conscientious partner,
they often store and stock lots of supplies, so that six month
window may not be enough time for them to work
through what they do have on hand,
and may put them in a situation of having things
that they have to dispose of that are not usable.
I'd like to try to figure out a way not to do that,
because that becomes non cost effective later
for purchasers in the area.
And I think through our outreach starting next month,
which is a couple days from now as we start in March, as we
with coba and all of the different folks
start doing that outreach.
We can identify what is that.
What is that appropriate leg.
And, and again, we've really looked at this.
Alex and I have gone through that code really
exterior siding is the primary thing that will impact builders,
especially what I would call the lower end production builders.
But the other night they said 2% to 3% $400.
Would you be able to.
And you said you looked at and said would you
be able to come back with us and let us
know what it's going to cost.
Yeah and I can certainly do that.
I will just tell you, not to get into too much detail is you will
hear 15% to 20% from a builder.
That would be what the cost is for just one particular element.
An example of deciding to go from what typically they're
using now is about a $40 piece of siding,
and it goes up to a $50 piece of siding.
That won't be the cost for the whole house.
That's just a cost for one building element.
And so they're focusing on the element, which is good to know.
It would just be interesting to see the cost
analysis for an entire unit.
I do and I don't want to hurt the projection builders that
are here and have their annexations approved
and their buildings coming out of the ground,
and all of a sudden now we're pulling the rug out
from underneath them and the cost
and prices are going to go up.
So, like I said, intuitive to what I normally would say.
I would like to give them some notice.
I know we're acting strange today.
I just don't know what to say.
Something's in the air.
Anything else.
That's it.
It's Juniper pollen.
It's in the air.
It's from my face.
Do you want to go over the budget.
Was there a budget or.
Well I'll start.
I got chief and I got Steve, who are going to talk
about some individual items.
So on March 10, we'll bring a pretty big budget
adjustment request to council.
Some of the items that I can just briefly talk about
is the wetlands complex.
With this good weather, we are really doing well out there,
but we need to bring about 7 million of that project
into the budget that we had planned for in next year.
So yeah, so we have a loan obviously, that we
can draw on for that project.
The other one, and we had this in our five year CIP,
a couple weeks ago with the council.
The East side arterial council's been approving those GMPs.
I think a year ago we were at 38 million
and now we're showing at 42 million.
That's all in that CIP.
But we need to adjust the budget a little bit for that.
Yeah so you don't get paid for a million this year.
All right.
So is that because of the addition
of the airport way in 19.
Yeah, there's.
Well, that one was assumed.
I think it's just the complexity of the project.
We had to buy some land, those sorts
of things that were as we get into these GMPs,
we're truing it up.
The top tracer will have to adjust the budget.
Council's already approved that.
And then I think, Steve, we're going
to go to you on the one item.
So I'll tee it up with and I have
at the end of these two presentations we can
talk about how much is left.
But basically, we've had that 4.4 million
from the public safety savings.
Now there is 2.4 million left.
If we get the North point utilities back with land sales,
we'll have 3.3 million left.
So we expect that most likely in the next three years,
probably some next year.
But we've got two items to talk about.
The first one is the desert rise in 17th Street cleanup.
So I'm going to give it to Steve OK.
Devin and I will tag team a little bit on this,
but obviously as we're getting close to well,
the managed camp is generally done with construction
pending a few punch list items.
And as I think it's been presented last week,
we're looking I think it's Friday,
Thursday or Friday this week.
The RFP comes in regarding operators, as been mentioned
in the conversations, is the County has
already what I would call a soft closure
on some of the DSL property.
When I say closure, notifying folks,
not saying you must be out yet, but say,
hey, don't settle in too much, don't
set up new encampments here because we're
going to be moving.
You don't want to move twice.
And they've already started helping assisting
the relocation of that.
With that in mind, we are also are very aware
of the amount over the course of the last 18 months,
the amount of new residents on the desert rise
property, it's sort of exploded.
I believe we have about 40 encampments
right now when I first started here,
we had about 10 encampments.
That's only been a year.
So it's really.
How many of these are creeping from.
Bend is bend is closed down.
I know that there's been a few.
Obviously, Natalie is one who kind of has been able to track
a little bit, and Devin might be able to speak what his team has
seen, but there has been a few that we know of and some of them
I couldn't tell you where they came from.
But with all that said, with the managed camp coming online,
and really that's the Nexus for us to start moving folks off
and some other instances that I'll let the chief talk to you
about is some of the concerns that PD has with why we need
to make this kind of a sooner than later aspect of clearing
out desert rise in 17th Street.
So I'm going to kick it to you, Devin,
if that's appropriate time just for my knowledge
or anybody is does it rise.
Yes I would call the office.
Thank you.
I'm just trying to figure out direction
of where does it rises.
South of midline.
So here's midline right there.
And this is desert rise.
This 40 acres right here.
Yeah right there.
Yeah so yeah.
So that area in the 17th Street.
So just to build on what Steve Shane said,
we're wanting to learn to take a more proactive approach.
As we talked about with County, completing one job.
Sorry this is a lot.
OK, so it's two pages.
Oh, no, I. Can't pass out paper today.
He's missing his heart.
Does anyone else need anything.
I should take off.
Keep going.
So anyways, I know we're pressed for time, but.
So, yeah, we're going to take a proactive approach that you
already kind of got the background
with what County started doing.
And so obviously we've had it's not a secret.
We've had multiple shootings out there.
And we're concerned again with this increase of population
moving back in towards the city.
And with the Manage camp coming online,
we want to take a proactive approach and get 17th
Street and the area all cleared out
and start working on that now.
And so timeline would be we get out there and in March.
Kind of let them know what's going on.
Communicate with service providers.
Start working on that outreach for the first 30 days,
pretty much all of March, just letting them hey,
this is coming.
You got to worry about the camp or they
but just reinforcing all the different resources we have
between Bethlehem and shepherd's house, safe parking,
manage camp, Oasis village, things like that.
And then come in April.
Then in April, we'll go ahead and start
working with in-person, giving them actual handouts,
in-person contact.
Natalie will be back to work in April
so she can start making contacts as well
and trying to again let people hey,
we're going to start moving you.
We want everybody out of here by June 1.
June 1 is when it's going to all be closed and cleaned.
And we want to we'll be trying to do obviously
some cleaning ahead of time.
Like, we'll get dumpsters out there.
If not only work with people, if there's a few stragglers
left behind.
We're not going to offer this up front, cause we don't want,
we've been taking advantage of this before.
But as we get closer, once we get into May,
we start posting final notices.
There's a handful of people out there that are like, look,
I'm trying to go.
I just I can't go.
Like, I need a car battery or I need a tow,
or I need a tire or something like that, or I need some gas.
At that point, cost of doing business
will take care of that to help that person get off.
We're not going to offer that because we've
been burned with that before.
Ideally, if we go through the notices we'll have I said,
we'll put may 1 be the final notice, get people moving.
Hopefully we'll have another notice
on May 15th with being the June 1 being
where everyone has to be out.
And then we'll follow that back up.
And obviously on June one people are still haven't left
and then we can start working on potential abatement
warrants on criminal trespass, arrests, things like that.
Obviously last resort.
We're looking for compliance.
I think we've shown a good history over the last few years
when we've had to clear our areas of getting good compliance
and not having to resort to that type of enforcement.
But ideally, that's what we want to do.
We're trying to get this done now so we don't continue to see.
We understand it's kind of like whack-a-mole.
You push a balloon and it goes to one side.
But if we don't start to do this joint effort, not really
joint effort, but do it at the same time as the County is,
I think we're going to be behind the eight ball,
and then we're going to move into summer,
and then we're going to be worried about fire
danger and things like that.
So that's the plan.
Yeah so so what we're here today to ask you
one is and this is why this is on the budget,
is we're going to jump right in here to the budget.
But it's also obviously making sure
you guys are comfortable with the plan
that we just kind of laid out about how we're going to start
again, very similar to how we've done it
in the past with outreach through our service providers,
with a little bit of a softer approach at the very beginning,
making sure we are respectful, we
are humane in the fact of giving opportunities to relocate.
And then it becomes a much more stern enforcement
with the goal to have folks off by one of June
in order to do that.
As we learn from several of these endeavors in the past,
it doesn't come without cost.
There's a cleanup cost, there's rehabilitation costs.
And just the practical side of it, as Jason put on,
we are estimating that cost.
And we feel this is a very conservative number.
I'd like to say we will be able to come below this number.
But what we're looking at about $150,000,
and that is a combination of the outreach in the beginning,
getting signage up, getting notification and that outreach,
obviously getting similar to what we did on the core
three property with the County.
What we did on Sixth and Umatilla,
setting up the dumpsters out there to help us get people
to put stuff in the dumpsters to get stuff cleared up,
knowing that we will have a significant impact of solutions
and towing, that we will have to have
abandoned stuff and the stuff that's left behind
and that is costly.
And then the other thing that you will also see on there
is then we have the opportunity.
How do we keep people from coming back on
and continually chasing them.
And it's the opportunity to actually get
that desert rise property in a condition
and in a marketable condition.
And that includes things of actually getting a sign up
there that talks about this property is available
and working with Steve and others to help really
start marketing that in line with what's
happening with the DSL property immediately to the Middle East.
And creating some demarcations out there to make it's
different.
It's not just out in the dirt.
It's actually part of that industrial zone out there.
So there is a lot bit of cost.
The only thing else I would say is you'll see a cost of 17th
Street striping we will be doing with
our Northpointe contractor, 17th Street from maple to Kingwood.
That is already planned to be striped with bike lanes
on both sides of the road.
Bike striped street with bike lanes
does not accommodate parking, and it would make sense
because it's the same basically connection of that road all
the way to I believe it's Greenwood where
dead ends to the South, 17 dead ends
into this desert rice property.
We would continue that striping and that no parking
along that section as well.
And we would make that as part of the contractors.
We'd add that onto the contractor
so it could be done most efficiently on that.
So that gets to that gets to where Jason started
off the money side of it.
We just wanted to obviously let you
guys know how we're going to do is make sure
that this approach is reasonable and meet
your guys' expectations.
And with that, I'll stop talking.
Question yes.
Where are you moving to.
Well, what you'll see on that first map
where it says green zone, that is,
the area in which the County has is basically relocating people.
We won't actively say go here, we'll just say
you can't go in the red zone.
They will most likely be moving into that green zone.
That would be my.
That's right.
Well yeah, we're telling them the red zone is we're
telling you can't go there.
If we tell someone go here, then we're responsible.
If something happens to them, if they go there.
But what we can do is say can't go to these other places,
and then we're not responsible if something
happens to them someplace else.
Can't from.
So there's.
Yeah we can prevent it with it.
Yeah we can prevent it within reason.
I mean we can't if somebody just lays down for it takes a nap.
We can't say you need to get out of here, but we can.
So you can't live here, right.
It's been.
And I'm just using him as an example
because I've seen him or her.
I haven't slowed down, but there for several days.
And so I can remove those people.
Yeah so.
And they do.
I know that our officers are out there moving people along
that maybe they just haven't encountered,
or maybe they're not there when they are.
I wasn't concerned about that one.
I was just thinking in general.
In general.
Yeah so the manager.
Yes, sir.
There is the way that I understand it.
And maybe you have more up to date information,
but the last information I had as of Thursday,
there was one submission and several no
thank yous for the RFP.
What happens to this budget and this plan
if there isn't a qualified entity to run the management.
Yeah and so the conversation to be determined,
however the conversation is there.
The County is aware that we're not
going to build this managed camp and not
open up this managed camp.
It may be an interim solution.
Such as a security and a manager.
Not necessarily a lot of case management.
A lot of that stuff in order to stand it up.
As we continue to work on some of that case management program,
I actually just had a conversation with Natalie
today off the clock to as far as what
some of the practicalities she sees,
it was actually quite encouraging about how she feels.
It could be done pretty.
It doesn't have to be overly complicated.
So there is some options.
If we don't we'll look like something no matter what OK.
And does that meet the criteria to say you don't have to go home
but you can't stay here.
Yes it's not like the old Martin v Boise days
where it was one for one.
It's now you have to be reasonable in your approach.
Yeah OK.
Any other questions on budget adjustments.
Nope we got one more.
One more.
Oh, we got more.
Speed up.
Jason it's for speed up.
Yeah so here I come back to all of you again.
We're going through a five year.
We're going through next year budget forecast
and 5 year budget forecast.
We started looking at things that
had been on the five year that were coming
up this year or next year.
And we're trying to figure out, looking at the budget, what
might be a good way of trying to get some of these items acquired
before the next year or 2, or maybe it's
going to end up helping us be able to reallocate
those other dollars for something different.
And so while we were going through this,
we had the idea of budget adjustment
using some of those savings to offset some of these costs.
So to go through the list evidence van.
We put that on about four years ago.
Currently, when we do large search warrants,
our detectives are working a major crime.
We're usually taking things back.
Either we'd have to use one or two CSOs
and load up a couple of our CISO trucks.
We have to go grab our training utility
trailer, which has all our training gear in it,
and then try to put evidence in that.
And we have the detectives just loading up their detective cars
with stuff.
So we've talked about this for a while.
We just honestly haven't really had it in the budget.
We've had it for the 2026 27 fiscal year.
But we knew, again, looking at that next year's budget,
we're probably going to have to get pushed out another year.
And so we wanted to bring that forward and see
if we could get that done, because obviously
we're having more major cases.
We're seeing more of a need for the evidence.
And then with the evidence, now that we can't take our evidence
over to Salem anymore, the evidence that
needs to be destroyed.
There's a potential.
They're going to have to start making trips up to Spokane
to get that destroyed.
And so I want them to have a vehicle that is obviously going
to be able to make that trip, as well as take all the evidence
they need all in one fell swoop.
So we've got the evidence van on there.
That's the ask for that.
So radio I know we just talked about doing portable radios,
and we're working on trying to finalize
if we're going to go with Harris or Motorola on those.
We're waiting to see how that goes for our radios,
portable radios.
These are in-car radios.
Some of our in-car radios are older, need to be replaced.
And then that also that's 19 of them
and then five new vehicles we anticipate getting
online over the next two years.
So this is essentially what we projected
for fiscal year 2627 and 2728.
Kind put that together.
And that should you'll see on the next line item as well.
Once we get our new portable radios purchased.
That wasn't for every.
That wasn't enough to get every person
in the Department a radio.
It was to get every police officer and Detective radio.
But this would allow us to get all of our staff,
including our non-sworn, our CSOs.
And then also have some spares for when ones go down
or as we continue to hopefully grow and hire people.
So that next slide line item for additional portable radios.
And like I said, those are both trying
to look at next fiscal year 2627 and 2728 forecasts.
When it comes to drones.
Drones have gone up a lot because the one the main reason
was we used to be able to get them
from different makers out of China,
and we can't do that anymore.
So now the American Made drones cost a lot more money.
And so looking at what the drone program, what they need
to replace their older drones and to get drones
that are going to be able to.
You, I guess a variety like we have.
We'll have a couple of different drones.
One, we have our larger drones and we can fly up.
They have a larger battery life.
They can get up and they can stay
up in flight for up to 30 minutes at a time, a lot more
than the 10 to 15 that our current ones can do.
If we're doing that, then we're not
having to bring them back and land
and replace batteries as much when we're on,
like a critical incident.
So just improves that officer safety for working a large,
either a large crime scene or maybe we have
a large motor vehicle crash.
We always can fly the drones up and try
to get a nice overview and a good outline
for our crime scene mapping.
And then this also includes smaller drones where we can
get them to fly inside houses.
So when we have somebody who's barricaded and won't come out,
we can get these drones that can fly inside
again, longer battery life.
Also, they've got the different capabilities
of infrared heat sink, heat sensors and things like that.
So again, something that was on this year's budget that we knew.
Yeah but we're hoping we could get with this budget adjustment.
So that's the ask on the drones for night vision.
That's another safety item.
So for our SWAT members on the team, most of the SWAT team
now has the night vision that it's on your helmet.
It comes down.
It's a binocular not a monocular.
So you have better vision, better field of view.
And when you're not in use can put it up.
We haven't been able to buy that for our redmoon cert members
just because of the cost.
And it's been something we've kind of been trying
to push out and push out.
And maybe we're going to start trying to buy a couple this year
and a couple next year.
But we thought since we have these funds,
we would ask if it'd be possible to come in and get
all the members on the team.
The new night vision.
So again, it mounts on their helmet.
It's just it's better because right
now what they have is a monocular that they have to take
out, turn on and then hold it.
So obviously, if you're holding one here,
that's not great when you need to have your hands on,
possibly like a weapon or a different type of tool.
So that's the night vision we're looking at.
The dose tower is that's just a radio tower
we would put on top of the PD.
That would increase our radio signal and our dispatch signal.
Currently there's some dead zones around the PD
that we're hoping to remedy with these new radios.
But the dispatch the dispatch techs recommend a dose tower.
Anyway, that's going to improve all of our radio systems
and including how things are communicating with dispatch.
At the PD.
And so we need to do that no matter what.
So we're going to have that now.
Otherwise, we'll be asking for it again in next year's budget.
And then a digital key box is with being at the New building.
This is a way to have all of our keys.
Like a spare key.
Like our spare keys.
Put somewhere.
So when we had a few weeks ago or after we moved in,
we kind of had a major power failure.
And so we realized that the way we have,
not everybody has a master key.
And so one of us had to get called to come out
of bed in the middle of the night
to let people back into the PD.
And we don't want to have to do that again,
but it needs to be meet certain security requirements.
So it seems expensive for a key box,
but that's how it meets all the requirements.
My first question was like, do I need that on my house.
Yeah, I right.
I know.
So what are those key rocks outside.
I made the joke.
I'm like, can we just get the frog.
And you put it under the frog.
And maybe nobody in the kids started
coming home at o'clock AM.
Good luck.
100% yeah.
I mean, unfortunately, it's just with law enforcement,
technology is growing and it's just become part of what we do.
And I understand this is a large ask,
but we're just trying to offset the next couple
of years of budget costs.
And this is some capital vehicle equipment
we thought we could bring.
And hopefully, if you guys thought
it would be a good use of some of those extra funds
and we could get these knocked off
and we'd be able to hopefully reallocate
the budget over the next couple of years to do that.
And then.
The money is, to my mind, the money
is police building and supporting
that your whole operation.
So I don't really have a problem with it,
but you just said there, you just finalized it.
We're going to have to figure out our budget down the road.
Yes, you have to.
You're going to have to carry yourself
around, run out of money.
And that's why we're bringing a lot of these
are like one time costs, so they're not
going to be reoccurring costs.
And so that's what we're trying to I
hear what you're saying Jay.
Definitely yeah we can handle basically replacing the vehicles
the ones that are in service.
If we bring along new officers, the vehicles, what we found
is there was about $1 million of over the five years
that we couldn't afford.
And this kind of knocks out almost 60%
So still some work to do.
But yeah, our budget general fund is balanced.
It's actually running a slight deficit.
So these are not something we can do
without hurting the financial.
So for the radios in the new tower for this cost,
this doesn't include service agreements
and ongoing maintenance.
No those are going to be included with what I got
what we got with the current one we got from a couple months ago.
Yeah I was going to say I just yeah,
that one I know we've talked a lot about
and we are going to end up signing that.
We're just again, we're just doing some final testing.
It's down to Harrison Motorola, and we're really just trying
to figure out what is going to work most consistently
and what's going to be safest and best for our officers.
Off ramp.
Because they're out of date.
So I haven't said no to a request for the police ever.
My only concern is we've spent a lot of money
on radios and cameras, and we keep adding to that list.
And I kind of like when does everybody
have the latest and greatest.
And I mean, is this the last request for this technology
that we're going to get.
Or I would tell you, yes.
Based off we went again, we weren't
planning on bringing this ask.
But as we started looking at this type of forecasting
over the next five years, like you said,
we were up over $1 million.
And so we thought, we have these funds now.
It's not a recurring cost.
So if we can knock this out, that's
going to hopefully help us balance
the budget moving forward over the next few fiscal years.
Well, life cycle.
Yeah what's the life cycle.
It is a reoccurring cost.
I mean, most of these are more realistic.
We're going to be five years plus on those radios.
They'll probably longer.
And the camera systems with that contract with axon, those
include replacements.
And that's part of your ongoing subscription costs.
Are the maintenance as part of the agreement
say you go with Motorola or the counter.
Is that part of the agreement.
The life cycle, the warranty.
They're not going to switch to a new technology and they will.
The warranty, the warranty and life cycle
will be in that contract.
Yes, I guess help me understand when
you do a replacement five or six years
where that money comes from.
So at that point, we'll have to reevaluate what
we have some of those radios.
A lot of times if you're sticking with that same program,
you can do like a trade in and get credit for,
but it's going to ultimately we'll have to see
where we're at in or six years.
OK, great.
You asked kind of where the money is coming from.
General fund.
Yeah Jason.
It's going to be fun.
Yeah, I think it comes from a different
it comes from a different counsel who has to vote.
Yeah that's different.
So it's my 19th budget.
Every single year is a grind for the general fund.
So we do an annual five year forecast.
So we're going to year two years from now,
we're going to probably start seeing a couple
of these items coming in.
We are planning for a drone program replacement program.
So yeah, it's general fund.
And that's the game we play.
We got to find a way to do it.
And, thankfully right now we do have some one time funds.
So we're thinking you know officers are
going to be tough real tough right now
to get so thought processes.
We're doing everything we can with one
timeout money to make things a little bit easier on the staff.
We have even this cleanup.
We have a lot of response calls out there,
so even that helps them.
So that's the idea right now is what can we do with one timeout
to make it easier on the staff we have.
Well, and again, this is coming from the surplus of what
was not spent on the building.
So in my mind, it's their money.
I mean they saved it.
And there are things they need to be
at the level they need to be.
And this makes sense if you're on the fire department.
Yeah they got their own problems.
How much of the eventual third shift is going to be.
I mean, will this protect.
We're talking about adding so all so this will accommodate.
So we're not going to come back with a oh
now we're adding another four officers.
We need to get 5 by for more radios.
No, this is projecting on what we're
hoping we'll be able to add over the next two years for bodies
so we can get to that third.
So we will have extra, extra equipment
in anticipation of FTE being added for the radios
and body cameras are.
Then I'm OK.
I'm good.
Thank you.
Good question.
Thank you.
That's a good question.
Are there more questions on this particularly just
to clarify too, especially around the cleanup,
the homeless 150,000.
We're just having the discussion on the budget adjustment.
It will come before council on March 10 for approval.
OK yeah.
We just wanted to gut check today
that we don't bring something that you're like, no way.
So I don't see the benefit of having people leave an area
and leave all that debris to blow and go
and get into our business zones.
So I think that that's going to have
to make sense at some point.
So it'll come before us March 10 and back to general fund.
That land is supposed to be sold for industrial.
I mean, I don't $5 a square foot.
I'm not a commercial.
I know that's higher.
Higher OK, so $5 a square foot is $9 million
and that's general fund.
So if we can market that and someday sell it,
the grind is a little bit easier for the general fund
for a while.
So yeah, that's the third reason is
we get that land in a position for what it was intended for,
which is to sell it for industrial.
All right.
We ensure our police drones so that when they screw up,
I want to see them fly.
Went into a house.
That's pretty good.
Oh, they do that for photos now.
My photographers fly them through.
They don't usually have some cracked up
baseball bat coming after it.
Have you seen what I missed.
Well, to be fair, that's true.
Cat does have a point there.
All right, if we're done with budget adjustments,
we'll move on to annexation ordinance
since we still have some time.
I got it.
Got more handouts for you today.
Sure watch this.
Look at me handout skills.
Throwing stones.
Showing up in there.
Slow down here.
That's right.
Just let me just toss this across that.
All right.
So this is more of an FYI item at this point in time.
Basically, Corey and myself, we've been working on actually
an annexation procedure.
So remarkably, in our development code,
we don't have any language on how we process annexation.
So historically, what we've done is we basically
direct applied state statute.
So there was an opportunity here,
especially after a lot of conversations
we had about annexations probably a year and a half ago.
And so we've gone in and basically we're
formalizing and codifying the annexation procedure
and approval criteria.
And what you have before you is the first draft.
Again, this is kind of meant for you guys
to just read digest, because ultimately this will come back
to you guys and the planning commission
probably in the April time frame for adoption.
So I'm not going to go through all of it.
But what I do want to highlight for you guys is
under the approval criteria, we have the standard stuff
that we've been used to.
But what we did add in this one was
a line that basically says that in order
to approve the annexation.
The annexation has to be in the city's best interest.
And I know that's very open ended.
But really what this means is that city can't really just ask
the developer, you incorporate whatever
we want in their development.
We can if it's like within the bounds of something in our code.
So for an example, can you remember a few years.
Well, actually it was the spruce Northwest master
development plan that Hayden Holmes did
in the Northwest part of town.
We had that conversation about, hey,
can you incorporate some commercial
or some childcare in that.
And they said, well, it's zoned residential
and we're only interested in doing
residential in this situation.
We could have asked for childcare or limited scale
commercial because in conjunction
with the master development plan,
our code does allow for that as a conditional use.
So does that make sense.
We can ask for things.
So as long as it's within the bounds of the code
while we're making code amendments, this is off topic.
I apologize.
Can we with our limited commercial
86 the food carts and neighborhoods.
I get so many complaints about food carts,
about food carts and the music, and the late
night and the 1970s.
Well, yeah, but the others as they come will do that.
I mean, it makes sense that you don't want to have that next
to a residential dwelling if they're
going to be having music and chemically
enhanced happy people.
That's problematic.
I mean, I get yeah, but I guess those were zoned
commercial from the get go.
So it's just being cognizant as we
but you could make an Amendment about commercial use
abutting residential zone.
If it was an actual residential house.
I mean, really, we can dive right into the standards
for food carts and do what we want.
So yeah, that would be part of the code Amendment process.
But specifically with this is the annexation piece.
And I'm trying to think we work with lights on this.
Dan, from a staff, staff perspective,
we feel pretty good about what we have in front of you.
I feel like it's getting close for adoption.
Ready but again, this was just more of an introduction
for you guys and give you guys the opportunity to take time
to look through it and come back with questions for Corey and I.
And so what I would want to see is
how we are interpreting city's best interest
because it is open and vague.
And so what do we currently today think that might
mean in an annexation.
And does it need guardrails or is it something
that we just leave open.
Is it defensible.
So for interest, for what you're talking about with food trucks
next to somebody's house, can we pull data on how many times
the house next door has been put on the market,
and how it's impacting residential Every house on 19th
on that street is going on.
It's been up twice since I. Yeah and on that piece,
the city's best interest.
The first part of doing annexation
is doing the annexation agreement.
And that's obviously before we would
even Annex A piece of property.
Council has to review and approve
the terms of that annexation agreement
in that topic about the city's best interests.
That's a good time to have that discussion on what the city
council cares about in terms of potential impacts
to the annexation.
What we want to include.
I guess my concern is I love that this is written in here,
but we've said before, these are the things we'd like to see.
And we've just been told, yeah, OK.
No and they do what they want to do.
This is what we're going to do and this
is what we're going to annex.
And we're sorry if you want it because we're
not going to give it to you.
But now that we're codifying language in the code,
it's much more defensible.
Defensible yeah.
It's defensible.
We have to have a platform and have it be defensible.
Exactly yeah.
So three or four years ago, whenever
we had the initial conversation about annexations by statute,
there's four things that they have to meet.
And if they meet those four, we, the council
can't require anything else.
They've met the 4 and two or three of the four
are really easy.
It has to be contiguous to the city.
It has to be this, that.
And so they just basically got automatic entry.
One of those four things is complies with city code.
Our city code was silent so it automatically complied.
This closes that.
So now we're getting language.
So that fourth requirement under state law
actually has something that they have to comply.
So this would allow us if they try to bring in the 1,200 acres,
to say we want to do it as a single development,
not piecemeal.
We could say it's in the best interest
to do a larger master plan development as opposed
to 50 acres at a time.
Maybe I haven't thought that part through.
I mean, if they sold those pieces off,
then probably not because they would have
a 50 acre contiguous piece.
So it depends on their approach, I don't.
I think you're probably worried about something that's not going
to happen in the next 10 months, but the or two
years or five years.
I mean, the County doesn't seem interested in that anyway,
but in theory, possibly, yeah.
The other thing is I was also concerned about the city's
best interest language.
We didn't invent that.
We took that from Hillsborough as well, I like that.
If we've got if they challenge it,
I mean, is it defensible with the state,
which we've been obviously based on.
I think the state worked or there was
somebody pointed us to that.
It pointed us to our DLCD pointed us to Hillsborough.
No, it was an outside counsel and that they
had helped draft it.
And it's my understanding it's battle tested.
That was my next.
Yeah because battle is it Battle tested.
And could it be deemed as arbitrary or
capricious if this area over here on the wrap
is this best interest.
And this over here on the East side is this best interest
and the best interest are different.
No, I think that's OK.
As long as you have findings that support why it's
in the city's best interest.
I like the objective.
Objective or subjective.
So yeah.
Again nope.
OK give it a read and look for comments,
thoughts, questions, concerns.
I'll just rewrite the whole thing.
Yeah, we can do that.
Is there a show or show I want to show.
On annexation ordinance, do we have any other questions,
comments before I open the table for the next seven minutes,
if there's anything additional people would like to discuss.
All right.
OK, then I'm going to pull an Ed and say we're adjourned.
For one.